Now I will REALLY open a can of worms: How about greater restrictions on drinking? (Maybe just penalties for drunk driving, certain types of drunken behavior and underage drinking, perhaps?) Oh, I'm sorry, I forgot, that would hurt most of Wisconsin economy because liquor is perhaps WI's most lucrative industry, along with "adult" bookstores or "gentlemen's clubs".

Originally posted by teacha:Now I will REALLY open a can of worms: How about greater restrictions on drinking? (Maybe just penalties for drunk driving, certain types of drunken behavior and underage drinking, perhaps?)

I think drunk driving should be punished by losing one's license for good. That's what happens in Finland. Do Finns drink less because of the law? No, they drink more actually. But they do not drink and drive. The smallest of towns have taxis to drive drunks home.

What do you mean by certain types of drunken behavior? It's already against the law to be drunk and behaving disorderly in a public place.

I'm all for enforcing under age drinking. I'd arrest those who provide the alcohol too. I will say I am opposed to the 21 drinking age. The laws need to be consistent. If you can vote and die for your country in a war at 18 then you should be able to drink. I grew up in New York where the drinking age had been 18 since Prohibition ended. Drinking was not a big issue in our school and, in fact, very few of us drank at 18. I chose not to drink.

The one difference between alcohol and tobacco is that alcohol can be enjoyed in moderation without harming the non drinkers in the establishment. Tobacco when smoked harms the non smokers in the establishment. It's a public health issue.

Nell

More women die of lung cancer than breast cancer. If you smoke, quit. If you don't, don't start.

Couple things to add though. I'd make the drinking age 19. There are fewer 19 year olds in high school that will be buying for all their friends...

Second, I think just more thoroughly enforcing the laws we already have for drunk driving, etc. would help. I know someone who was drunk and caused an accident. He basically received probation and one term of that was he couldn't drink for a year and he had to attend a class. The class was a joke and he was drinking within a few months. He even got caught one evening by his probation officer. One night in jail and no further punishment... Yep, that'll teach him it's serious wont it? He was drinking a couple of days later again and the probation officer never stopped by to check him again at random, he new when he was going to be tested every time after that.

Abnerman, then you are the only one. I stand by my statement. What you do to yourself is totally up to you! It is the sharing that I have issues with. My friend never touched a cigerette, nor did the family. It was not just any cancer, it was lung cancer, from second hand smoke. I know more then one person that has had or does have cancer, most, are smokimg related. If the smoker exhales their smoke around others, they willingly and knowingly sharing the poisons. In my opinion, that is premeditated murder, simply because the smoker knows the dangers and still CHOOSES to force nonsmokers to breath the smoke. I do not care who takes offense to my opinions, I wll not change my opinion because there is ONE smoker in the world that is considerate of nonsmokers. If everyone who smoked was as condiderate as Abnerman claims to be, we would not even have this issue. So you are addicted, get help then, there are many resources. You do not have to smoke!

To get back to the original topic, I don't agree with forcing some nonsmokers' agenda on a private business. Business owners reserve the right to run their businesses as they see fit, within the law, to make money. They, and only they, will decide if/where smoking (or any other legal activity) is allowed on their property and have a duty to make that known to all who enter. Then, if you KNOW that smoking is going on inside a building and you still choose to enter, you've lost your right to complain. That's like the guy who builds a house next to a pig farm and then complains about the smell and wants the farmer shut down. By entering the establishment you've agreed to the house rules. Bottom line, if you don't want to be around smokers then don't put yourself in a place/situation where you will be exposed. That's just common sense. Your only fair recourse, as I see it, is to find/start/convince a business to cater to your wants. That way, if there is enough public support for a non-smoking establishment, it will succeed on it's own WITHOUT trampling the free choice of others.

When you wish upon a falling star, your dreams can come true. Unless it's really a meteorite hurtling to the Earth which will destroy all life. Then you're pretty much hosed no matter what you wish for. Unless it's death by meteor.

Originally posted by Brian: Business owners reserve the right to run their businesses as they see fit, within the law, to make money. They, and only they, will decide if/where smoking (or any other legal activity) is allowed on their property and have a duty to make that known to all who enter. Then, if you KNOW that smoking is going on inside a building and you still choose to enter, you've lost your right to complain. ......By entering the establishment you've agreed to the house rules. Bottom line, if you don't want to be around smokers then don't put yourself in a place/situation where you will be exposed.

Brian, 20% of Americans smoke. 99.9% of restaurants and bars allow smoking if there are no anti smoking laws. Shouldn't only about 20% of restaurants and bars offer smoking? This issue wouldn't be an issue if even 50% of such places were non smoking. What you are saying to us 80% is stay home, we don't want you. I do stay home rather than eat in a smoking place. Smoke is deadly to my lungs.

There was a restaurant in Tomahawk, the Meyers owned it. I think it was on Half Moon. It was very small and had less ventilation than your average bathroom. It did have good food. This was in my pre lung disease days but I've always been allergic to smoke. My then husband and I had to leave our non-smoking group (the only non smokers there that night) early because my eyes swelled shut.

Name me one restaurant in Tomahawk that was smoke free? Are there even any now? The Pine Tree supposedly has a non smoking section but because they have almost no ventilation in reality there is no non smoking section. I've said before I wouldn't have a problem if restaurants had true non smoking sections but they don't.

Smoking is a public health issue, just like washing hands after using the restroom is, cooking food to a certain temperature is. If 80% of the population is to stay home a lot of businesses would be gone.

I could care less about my right or anyone elses' to complain. I do care about my right, the rights of babies and children who have no choice, the rights of people with allergies and lung disease, to breath smoke free air. Smoking kills and has a long list of undesirable effects on health.

The pig farm analogy isn't the same because there is no public health issue involved.

Nell

More women die of lung cancer than breast cancer. If you smoke, quit. If you don't, don't start.

Originally posted by nugget:I wll not change my opinion because there is ONE smoker in the world that is considerate of nonsmokers. If everyone who smoked was as condiderate as Abnerman claims to be, we would not even have this issue.

Nugget, there are actually a good number of considerate smokers in the world. By my estimation it's about 50/50. My mother was a considerate smoker in her later years. Now, when I was growing up she did smoke in the house and through all of her pregnancies but at that time the surgeon general's report wasn't out. Doctor's even told people to smoke to reduce stress. Today is different. The ill effects of smoke are well known. I believe Abnerman when he says he is a considerate smoker.

Nell

More women die of lung cancer than breast cancer. If you smoke, quit. If you don't, don't start.

Good for you. That's voting with your pocketbook. Be sure to let the restaurant manager know that you won't patronize that establishment until it is smoke free. If enough people feel the same way you do (80% was the figure you quoted), then businesses will be jumping on your bandwagon voluntarily.

Smoking is a public health issue

Of course it is. The proposed ban, however, was not. You want to try to ban smoking in public areas, go ahead and have at it. You'd have a point there since we all have to share 'public' space. The big difference is in trying to carry that policy over to a private establishment. That's where your policy took a wrong turn.

The pig farm analogy isn't the same because there is no public health issue involved.

You just said there was. Now you're saying, er... what? (*hint* - trust the pig farm analogy on this one. That IS what your policy looks like)

When you wish upon a falling star, your dreams can come true. Unless it's really a meteorite hurtling to the Earth which will destroy all life. Then you're pretty much hosed no matter what you wish for. Unless it's death by meteor.

It really does no good trying to talk to some folks. Once they presume that anyone who smokes must be an idiot, well, it will be hard to get another word in edgewise. What they really are trying to say is that anyone who does not agree with their position must be an idiot, and I just don't see how one could have intelligent discourse with a person who feels this way. They will continue to use their flawed logic to chip away at what few liberties we have left until we all live the way "they" want us to. They continue to point out the health aspect of this particular issue as if that is a good reason to restrict property and business owners. You so aptly pointed out that smoking is not an illegal activity, but you now see that this makes absolutely no difference whatsoever to them. Your wisdom and logic on this issue are inescapable and make perfect sense to me. I am retiring to the deck to have another cigar.

It really does no good trying to talk to some folks. Once they presume that anyone who smokes must be an idiot.................... I am retiring to the deck to have another cigar.

Actually Dave I've pointed out that many smokers are indeed very considerate.

As for cigars they are actually less damaging to helth because the tobacco is purer. Cigar smokers tend to get a skin cancer on their lips which is easily treated. Tobacco itself would be far less damaging were it not for the carcinogens and additives the tobacco industry adds to the tobacco.

How come you smoked on your dock? Not allowed to smoke inside your house?

I still would like to know if any Tomahawk restaurants and bars are voluntarily smoke free or ever have been. I'm not talking about fast food places. Many of them are smoke free because of corporate policy.

Nell

More women die of lung cancer than breast cancer. If you smoke, quit. If you don't, don't start.

I still would like to know if any Tomahawk restaurants and bars are voluntarily smoke free or ever have been.

Why? The fact that you have to ask kind of proves the point - if nonsmoking bars/restaurants are such wonderful ideas, why haven't they flourished? According to what some here have written, there must be an ENORMOUS untapped market of non-smokers just waiting for someone to open a clean air bar/restaurant. You can't lose. Pool your money and get one opened. You'll make a fortune! Right?

When you wish upon a falling star, your dreams can come true. Unless it's really a meteorite hurtling to the Earth which will destroy all life. Then you're pretty much hosed no matter what you wish for. Unless it's death by meteor.

Originally posted by Brian: Why? Pool your money and get one opened. You'll make a fortune! Right?

Well Brian, I don't know the first thing about running a restaurant. Secondly, I'm a nurse in an urban school district so where would I get the money?

BTW, there are a few non smoking restaurants here that have flourished long before our 2 month old smoking ban. Lake Elmo Inn and Forepaughs to name two.

You indirectly did answer my question. Tomahawk restaurant owners do not care about the risks to their own health, that of their employees, or of their patrons. Oh well, when they are dying of preventable diseases they might wish they'd done things differently. And when I visit Tomahawk I'll continue to not leave any of my money anywhere but Natural Impressions, the scrapbook shop

Nell

More women die of lung cancer than breast cancer. If you smoke, quit. If you don't, don't start.

I feel that without a doubt, smoking in all public establishments will be ILLEGAL before my time on this earth ends. In general, that is a good thing for the health of all involved (whether they like it or not).

But as for now, the individuals that see smoking as a detriment to their health... and don't like to be around it.. have the luxury of deciding NOT to be around it in an enclosed public/private business. They have the choice.

What is there to argue about? It's unhealthy. That's a fact. I know it, everyone knows it.. (and I still do it at this time). But I have the RIGHT to do it at this time as well. Just as people that don't do it have the right not to go somewhere that they will be exposed to it.

The person that has a problem with being around something that others are entitled to do in a privately owned business if they so choose, has the choice and the right NOT to expose themselves to it. And the owners of private establishments have the right to allow it or not. Simple.

The early bird may get the worm, but the second mouse gets the cheese....

As part of the settlement, cigarette vending machines will be banned, no advertising of cigarettes will be permitted, and nicotine will be regulated. This means the Marlboro Man and Joe Camel are history.

In addition, all cigarette packages will be required to carry warnings, such as "Cigarettes are addictive" and "Cigarettes can kill you". Surprise!

Millions of smokers are in a quandry. Keep on smoking in the face of the admission by the cigarette makers that their product is deadly and addictive, or try and quit.

"Sure does make one look stupid," admitted a long-time smoker wearing a Marlboro tee-shirt, " and part of the deal is we can't sue the bastards for conspiring to kill us."

The cigarette settlement must be approved by President Clinton, and a US Congress notorious for receiving campaign contributions from the tobacco industry. "You gotta believe that the only reason the cigarette makers agreed to pay $368 billion over 25 years was because worse things could have happened to them in court," noted a Capitol Hill veteran.

"Screwing the trial lawyers may be one of the most popular aspects of the settlement," added our Capitol commentator.

What is unknown at this time is what the response of America's nicotine addicts will be to the settlement news. "The first thing I'm going to do is stockpile as many cartons of cigarettes as I can," noted one smoker. "The problem is going to be where to smoke them, since the settlement is obviously going to strengthen efforts to ban smoking in public."

One of the more serious impacts of the settlement will be the requirement that cigarettes be sold from behind the counter in stores. "My whole store is filled with cigarette ads and cigarette displays," wailed the owner of a Circle K in Tucson. "I guess I'll have to replace everything with beer ads."

The settlement also bars the tobacco industry from sponsoring sports events. "Darn it," muttered a member of a NASCAR racing team sponsored by a famous cig brand, "now we gotta find a new sponsor. This ain't gonna look pretty as the Handiwipe Special."

A black market of full nicotine-strength cigarettes is expected. "This is great," chortled a Columbian cocaine dealer, "now we've got something new that will be illegal to sell in the United States. This could make us billions."

Probably the most severe impact of the settlement will be all the non-smokers going "nah, nah, nah, I told you so," to the smokers of America.

Wait....it's kosher to smoke pot at outdoor concerts? I was always under the impression that that sort of thing was illegal everywhere.

That's a big pet peeve of mine. I go see The Dave Matthews Band at Alpine Valley every summer, and as soon as the bands start playing, a funny smell creeps along the valley. Personally, after paying 52 dollars to see the death-rattle of Jazz, i want to enjoy it sober and remember it.

Baby, you know if you’re not beautiful /Just cover it up /With make-up kits and perforated scalpel seams,/ We’ll do you right up/ I’m so obsessed with looking like celebrities/ Make myself throw up /But it’s all right cause one day I know I’ll be fine/ like everyone else.